Re: foobillard package

2003-01-08 Thread Graham Wilson
On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 09:25:50PM +0100, Frank Gevaerts wrote: > This means that either : > a foobillard goes to non-free, which would be a pity. > b The fonts are removed from the package, which gets foobillard to > contrib, but with dependencies on ttf-larabie-straight and > ttf-la

Re: foobillard package

2003-01-08 Thread Graham Wilson
On Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 09:25:50PM +0100, Frank Gevaerts wrote: > This means that either : > a foobillard goes to non-free, which would be a pity. > b The fonts are removed from the package, which gets foobillard to > contrib, but with dependencies on ttf-larabie-straight and > ttf-la

Re: foobillard package

2003-01-08 Thread Paul Cupis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 08 Jan 2003 20:25, Frank Gevaerts wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to package foobillard (http://foobillard.sunsite.dk/) for > debian. I have the following problems : [snip] > Should I file an ITP bug? Yes. Paul Cupis - -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: foobillard package

2003-01-08 Thread Paul Cupis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 08 Jan 2003 20:25, Frank Gevaerts wrote: > Hi, > > I'm trying to package foobillard (http://foobillard.sunsite.dk/) for > debian. I have the following problems : [snip] > Should I file an ITP bug? Yes. Paul Cupis - -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]

foobillard package

2003-01-08 Thread Frank Gevaerts
Hi, I'm trying to package foobillard (http://foobillard.sunsite.dk/) for debian. I have the following problems : - I am not a DD, so I will need a sponsor (or the package will have to remain unofficial) - foobillard is GPL, but is distributed with 3 non-free fonts (larabie). This means that e

foobillard package

2003-01-08 Thread Frank Gevaerts
Hi, I'm trying to package foobillard (http://foobillard.sunsite.dk/) for debian. I have the following problems : - I am not a DD, so I will need a sponsor (or the package will have to remain unofficial) - foobillard is GPL, but is distributed with 3 non-free fonts (larabie). This means that e

Re: Missing files in /etc

2003-01-08 Thread Raphael Hertzog
Le Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 01:37:01PM +0100, Karolina Lindqvist écrivait: > Only that I don't know what to tell apt-get to reinstall such files. And > then, > if another file should not be reinstalled, only the essential ones, how to > deal with that? > > There does not appear to be any option to

Re: Missing files in /etc

2003-01-08 Thread Raphael Hertzog
Le Wed, Jan 08, 2003 at 01:37:01PM +0100, Karolina Lindqvist écrivait: > Only that I don't know what to tell apt-get to reinstall such files. And then, > if another file should not be reinstalled, only the essential ones, how to > deal with that? > > There does not appear to be any option to apt

Missing files in /etc

2003-01-08 Thread Karolina Lindqvist
I have a problem with files in /etc As I understand, they are marked as "conffiles". The problem is if such a file is missing, it won't be reinstalled. How to tell the package system that this file should be reinstalled if it is deleted? i.e. The file is essential, and can't be missing. This has

Missing files in /etc

2003-01-08 Thread Karolina Lindqvist
I have a problem with files in /etc As I understand, they are marked as "conffiles". The problem is if such a file is missing, it won't be reinstalled. How to tell the package system that this file should be reinstalled if it is deleted? i.e. The file is essential, and can't be missing. This has

Re: questions on packaging

2003-01-08 Thread Bas Zoetekouw
Hi Tommaso! You wrote: > Should I wait for my application to be approved or look for a sponsor? No, just go ahead and find a sponsor. > Should I report an ITP even if I'm not a Debian Developer? Yes, definately. -- Kind regards, +

Re: questions on packaging

2003-01-08 Thread Bas Zoetekouw
Hi Tommaso! You wrote: > Should I wait for my application to be approved or look for a sponsor? No, just go ahead and find a sponsor. > Should I report an ITP even if I'm not a Debian Developer? Yes, definately. -- Kind regards, +